People will stop believing in evolution after you feed them creationist arguments
From EvoWiki
Contents |
Claim
Acceptance of the theory of evolution exists only because creationist arguments are not well-known. If you feed creationist arguments to an evolutionist, he will switch to the creationist side.
Source
This is not really a claim, but something which seems to be a widespread belief among beginner creationists, judging from Talk.Origins newbies. It's what always happens in Jack Chick pamphlets:
- Jack Chick, Big Daddy?, Chick Publications
- Jack Chick, In the Beginning, Chick Publications
- Jack Chick, It's Coming!, Chick Publications
- Jack Chick, Killer Storm, Chick Publications
Responses
- Creationist arguments are full of misunderstandings, fallacies, distortions, half-truths and untruths. See the List of creationist arguments. You can't expect to win support from knowledgeable persons if you use such arguments.
- Creationist arguments are also well known, at least in evolutionist circles (such as those at the discussion groupTalk.Origins). They will be refuted in no time.
- If you sport a know-all attitude, have no actual answers, and expect to win converts with semantics games, you will get refutations and flames.
- Some people may indeed stop accepting evolution after hearing creationist arguments, but science isn't about belief or popularity contests; it's about evidence. Creationist evidences consistently fail the test of science.
- Though this claim has existed for many decades already, it has not yet come true. It is rather akin to the fundamentalist Protestant fascination with "the Rapture" and the belief that it is always just a few weeks away...and has been for the last several centuries.
- How can creationism be obscure in a country where eighty-five percent call themselves Christian and about one-half of its citizens believe the Book of Genesis is a literal narrative of real events?
- add more responses
Fallacies contained in this claim
- Relativism (suggesting that a reasonable person would not prefer evolution over creationism)
- Escape to the Future (tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow...)
- False Dichotomy (they think if they can prove evolution wrong, then creationism must be the only other answer)
- add more fallacies
